Hi Marcos - given this spec is in the Candidate Recommendation state,
before a CfC to publish a new LCWD is started, I think it would be
helpful if you provided a list of the changes you propose and a short
summary for each change. WDYT?
I don't have a strong opinion on where the list of changes is documented
but I think you previously included change lists in the spec itself and
that would be fine here too.
-AB
On Jun/2/2011 11:24 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 6/2/11 5:13 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Marcos
Caceres<marcosscace...@gmail.com> wrote:
Quote from WARP:
"""
Let sub domains be the result of applying the rule for getting a
single attribute value to the value of the subdomains attribute. If
the value of sub domains is not a valid boolean value, then this
element is in error and the user agent MUST ignore this element.
"""
subdomains has a default value of false so why is ignoring the
complete<access> element needed? If only the subdomains is to be
ignored, then the steps for processing the config.xml need to be
changed to include the default value.
I've removed the following two tests from the test suite until we get
this resolved:
# ic (download, files)
Tests that the UA ignores an access element with an invalid subdomains
value. To pass, the remote script must NOT load and PASS must remain
displayed.
# id (download, files)
Tests that the UA ignores an access element with an invalid subdomains
value. To pass, the remote script must NOT load and PASS must remain
displayed.
Proposed fix:
[[
5. If the subdomins attribute is absent, then let sub domains be the
value false. Otherwise, or let sub domains be the result of applying
the rule for getting a single attribute value to the value of the
subdomains attribute.
6. If the value of sub domains is not a valid boolean value, then let
sub domains be the value false.
]]
I've put that into the editor's draft. I call to republish the spec
with the correction ASAP.
Kind regards,
Marcos
